Click on here for Title Air and Rail setting the record straight on - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Click on here for Title

Air and Rail

setting the record straight on environment, investment, mobility and political bias

Mike Ambrose Director General

Click on here for Title

WHY A NEW STUDY?

 EC and State policies together with financial subsidies are

heavily balanced in favour of rail, especially High Speed Rail (HSR)

 EC advocates modal substitution claiming HSR’s green

credentials, social and economic benefits and returns on investments

 The preferences for rail are not supported by objective

published analyses, assessments and other evidence The ERA study attempts to provide the objectivity needed to ensure a better balance between air and rail

Click on here for Title

 The existing air and rail networks

in Europe

 The environmental

consequences of air and rail transport

 What makes the better economic

sense, investment in air or rail?

 Is the consumer better served by

modal complementarity, competition or substitution?

 The regulatory and political

approach to air and rail transport

KEY FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

TOPICS COVERED

Click on here for Title

KEY FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Click on here for Title

Enterprises and turnover

 The number of

aviation-related enterprises is 5.6 times higher than the number of rail enterprises in Europe

 The turnover of EU-

27 air transport market is almost twice that of railways

Click on here for Title

Modal substitution

The EC’s policy of mode substitution from air to rail has proved unsuccessful

Click on here for Title

State subsidies

The EU-27 yearly State subsidies for rail are 125 times higher than State aid granted to air transport

Click on here for Title

Connectivity and networks

 EU airports

and airlines

• ffer 150,000

city pairs versus 100 from HSR Air transport is the true Trans- European Network

Click on here for Title

Connectivity and networks

Expanding the HSR network to link all major city-pairs currently connected by at least 10 flights a day would:

 require a 600%

increase in the HSR network

 result in less than 5%

reduction of flights demand by 2030 [EUROCONTROL]

Click on here for Title

Environmental consequences

 fair comparison of CO2 emissions

between air and rail is not possible due to the different sources of power

 rail’s nuclear footprint has a massive

impact



for example, the estimated cost of UK nuclear decommissioning and waste disposal of the 19 existing nuclear plants is €100bn over 50 years



recent events have called into question the safety of nuclear power

 no energy source has a ‘zero’ impact

• n society

KEY FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Environmental consequences

Click on here for Title

Environmental consequences

KEY FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Environmental consequences

 Traditional comparisons of the

environmental impact of comparable emissions ‘at the point of use’ distort the results

 The ‘greenness’ of HSR is

unfounded when assessed from a full ‘life cycle’ perspective

 Independent data show that for

various HSR routes emissions from rail are higher than an equivalent air route [CO/150%,

NOx/50%, VOC/500%, PM10/150%]

Click on here for Title

Investment sense

 The average investment cost of a new

runway builds just 30 km of HSR track

[Frankfurt’s new €4bn runway and terminal will deliver a +50% capacity and 97,000 additional jobs]  By contrast the planned Turin-Lyon

HSR link forecasts losses of €19bn

• ver the life of the project; similar

losses expected for the London- Midlands HSR project

 Renewed investment in regional

airports and SESAR would reduce un- accommodated demand by up to 40%

Environmental consequences

KEY FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Investment sense

Click on here for Title

Investment sense

Rail investments have often resulted in huge losses for taxpayers

Click on here for Title

Consumer benefits

 Rail versus Air - is the

consumer better served by complementarity, competition

• r substitution?

 Rail and air can complement

each other [and offer more choice and convenience to consumers] provided complementarity is based on fair competition and freedom of consumer choice

Investment sense Environmental consequences

KEY FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Consumer benefits

Click on here for Title

Inter-modality

Increasing the attractiveness

• f intermodality requires

considerable and expensive improvements in:

 price and journey time  schedule coordination  seamless security checks  compatibility of IT infrastructure

and booking systems

 air/rail coordination in case of

missed connections

 passenger rights

Investment sense Environmental consequences

KEY FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Inter-modality

Click on here for Title

Regulatory aspects

 Unjustified differentiation exists

in Air/Rail passenger rights:

 exemptions are granted to rail

• perators but not air

 compensation is not due to rail

passengers for circumstances not connected with the operation of railway

 amount of compensation  air: € 125 - € 600  train: 25% - 50% of ticket price

 Unbalanced security standards

and funding of security costs

Inter-modality Investment sense Environmental consequences

KEY FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Regulatory aspects

Click on here for Title

Trans-European Networks

Out of 30 TEN-T EU priority projects:

 19 to rail

(€318.7bn)

 1 to air

(€1.34bn)

Click on here for Title

Conclusions

 The study uses information

and source data from open and published sources

 ‘Green credentials’ of HSR are

• ften unjustified and unclear

 HSR will not deliver cost-

effective mobility

 Complementarity rather than

substitution would better serve users’ interests

 Future investments should be

supported by more objective business cases

Inter-modality Investment sense Environmental consequences

KEY FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Conclusions

Click on here for Title

Conclusions

 A level playing field should

be based on fair competition and equal treatment between competing modes

 Preferential treatment

granted to a single transport mode based on poor or inexistent evidence can no longer be justified

Inter-modality Investment sense Environmental consequences

KEY FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Conclusions